Docstoc

The Juvenile Justice System

Document Sample
The Juvenile Justice System Powered By Docstoc
					                      Facts on Kids in South Dakota
                                                                               Volume 7, 1st Quarter-2006



       The Juvenile Justice System
     Introduction
      This issue of Facts on KIDS and the next will cover               led to the need for a specialized court to handle
      the topic of the Juvenile Justice system. It will begin           legal issues involving children.”1 The juvenile court
      with a historical look at juvenile justice - reforms and          exercised its authority based on the British doctrine of
      changes in law. The next issue will cover the juvenile            parens patriae (the State as parent). A key element was
      justice system in South Dakota.                                   the focus on the welfare of the child. The delinquent
                                                                        child was seen as in need of intervention. The State
     History of Juvenile Justice                                        had the inherent power and responsibility of protecting
       In order to understand the juvenile justice system, it will      children until they were ‘rehabilitated’ or became
     be helpful to look at how it developed historically. Early         adults. By 1924 only two states did not have a juvenile
     in U.S. history, children who broke the law were treated           court.
     the same as adult criminals. Throughout the late 18th
     century, “infants” below the age of reason (traditionally          The 1950’s - 1970’s
     age 7) were presumed to be incapable of criminal intent               In the 1950’s and 60’s public concern grew about the
     and were, therefore, exempt from prosecution and                   increasing number of juveniles institutionalized for an
     punishment. Children as young as 7, however, could stand           indefinite period of time. Lawsuits in the 1960’s argued
                                                 trial in criminal      that the civil proceedings of the juvenile courts did
                                                  court for offenses    not afford youths, who were facing confinement, due
                                                  committed             process of law as established in the Bill of Rights (5th
                                                  and, if found         and 14th Amendments). The U.S. Supreme Court made
                                                  guilty,      could    a series of decisions based on lawsuits that formalized
                                                  be sentenced to       the juvenile courts. As a result “formal hearings were
                                                  prison or even to     required in situations where juveniles were waived
                                                  death.                to adult courts; juveniles facing confinement were
                                                        A shift in      required to be given the right to receive notice of charges
                                                  society’s views       held against them, and the right to have an attorney
                                                  came in the           represent them. “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” had
                                                  19th      century.    to be established, instead of just “a preponderance of
                                                  Reformers             evidence” for an adjudication.”2
                                                  b e c a m e              Congress weighed in on juvenile justice and in
                                                  concerned about       1968 passed the Juvenile Delinquency Prevention
                                                  the overcrowded       and Control Act. The Act encouraged states to handle
                                                  conditions      in    children charged with a status (non-criminal) offense
                                                 the jails and the      outside the court system.
     corruption youth experienced when confined. Reformers                  In the 1970’s Congress passed the Juvenile Justice
     became more interested in rehabilitating juveniles instead         and Delinquency Prevention Act. As a condition for
     of punishing them. In response, Houses of Refuge opened            states to receive federal funding they were required to
     as facilities exclusively for children. In the mid-nineteenth      deinstitutionalize status offenders and non-offenders
     century Houses of Refuge were replaced with training               and to separate juvenile delinquents from adult
     schools.                                                           offenders.
       The 19th-century reform movement also led to the
     establishment of the juvenile court in the U.S. The first           1980’s and 1990’s
     juvenile court in the U.S. was established by the Illinois            The 1980’s and 1990’s were significant in changing
     legislature in 1899. It was “believed that children differed       treatment of many juvenile offenders as criminals. In
     from adults in significant ways and that these differences          the 1980’s juvenile delinquency and violent behavior


South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project ♦ PH: (605) 677-5287 ♦ FAX: (605) 677-5427 ♦ Email: kidscount@usd.edu ♦ http://www.sdkidscount.org
                      Facts on Kids in South Dakota
                                                                                Volume 7, 2nd Quarter-2006


       The Juvenile Justice System &
       Disproportionate Minority Contact
     Introduction
       This issue of Facts on KIDS continues with the topic             Predisposition Investigation & Probation
       of the Juvenile Justice system. The South Dakota                 Supervision
       juvenile justice systems and disproportionate minority             Court Services Officers within the Unified Judicial
       contact (DMC) will be discussed.                                 System’s Court Services Department             prepares a
                                                                        “prehearing social case study”. Court Services Officers
     South Dakota’s Juvenile Justice System1                            may give recommendations and prepare social case
        The responsibility for the juvenile justice system in           histories when court-ordered. The court sets the terms and
     South Dakota is shared among county governments, the               conditions of probation. An individualized Supervision
     state court, and state executive branches. Counties are            Plan, in addition to the Conditions of Probation as set
     responsible for the prosecution of juvenile offenses and           forth by the court, is required.
     detention in the preadjudicatory period. In addition, one
     dispositional option open to judges is sentencing for up           Juvenile Corrections Continuum
     to 90 days in a county juvenile detention facility. The               If the youth is to be placed out of the home, the juvenile
     Unified Judicial System’s Court Services Department                 is committed to the Department of Corrections (DOC),
     provides predisposition investigation and probation                which administers juvenile institutions. The South
     supervision services through seven judicial districts.             Dakota DOC operates programs such as the Patrick Henry
     The Department of Corrections administers the state’s                                                   Brady Academy, Youth
     juvenile correctional services in the post-adjudicatory                                                  Challenge Center or
     phase. What follows is a brief description of the system.                                                the Living Center for
                                                                                                              boys and the QUEST
     Detention                                                                                                or EXCEL programs
        County executive agencies administer South Dakota’s                                                   for girls. Youth can
     seven secure detention facilities. A youth may be detained                                               also be placed with
     if he or she is:                                                                                         the Department of
        (1) a fugitive from another jurisdiction;                                                             Human         Services,
        (2) charged with certain offenses;                                                                    in foster care or in
        (3) already held in detention or on conditional                                                       private care. Juvenile
            release in connection with another delinquency                                                    Corrections Agents,
            proceeding; and                                                                                   working in 17 offices
        (4) failing to appear for juvenile court proceedings,           across the state, interview juveniles to make placement
            violent conduct, or adjudications for serious               recommendations.
            property offenses.
                                                                        Direct Placement
     Delinquency & Diversion                                              The court can place a juvenile directly in a local
        By statute, a state’s attorney must conduct a preliminary       or private placement only for chemical dependency
     investigation to determine whether further action should           placements and into short-term detention facilities. Direct
     be taken after receiving a delinquency referral. The               placements to detention centers may not last longer than
     state’s attorney has the option to decide to refer the matter      90 days. The court may place the juvenile at the Human
     to a court-approved juvenile diversion program for                 Services Center for examination and treatment. A Court
     any informal action outside the court system. Informal             Services Officer supervises the juvenile while he or she is
     adjustment may last no longer than three months. The               in direct placement.
     state’s attorney may also file a petition to bring the child
     before the court.

South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project ♦ PH: (605) 677-5287 ♦ FAX: (605) 677-5427 ♦ Email: kidscount@usd.edu ♦ http://www.sdkidscount.org
     Facts on Kids in South Dakota


Release                                                                   “representation” of minority youth at all decision points along
  The Secretary of Corrections may order the release of                   the juvenile justice system continuum.
a juvenile from the Department of Corrections (DOC) as
a reward for good conduct upon satisfactory evidence of                   DMC Core Requirements of JJDP Act
reformation. Also, the court may order a youth’s release from               States must address specific delinquency prevention and
the DOC after a hearing to determine if release will promote              system improvement efforts to reduce the rate of contact with
the youth’s best interests.                                               the juvenile justice system of a specific minority group, if
  Within 30 days after a juvenile is committed to the DOC                 that rate is significantly greater than the rate of contact for
and every 90 days thereafter while the juvenile remains in a              whites or for other minority groups. The purpose of this core
correctional placement, the DOC must file with the court that              requirement is to ensure equal and fair treatment for every
committed the youth a report that contains: the results of any            youth (regardless of membership in a minority or majority
assessments of the youth concerning the youth’s emotional,                population group) involved in the juvenile justice system.
mental, educational, psychological, psychiatric, medical,                 Minority populations are defined as non-white and grouped
physical, or health status and needs; information regarding               as: American Indian or Alaska Native; Asian; Black or
the placement of the youth within particular programs                     African-American; Hispanic or Latino; Native Hawaiian or
administered by the DOC; and progress of the youth in                     Other Pacific Islander.
programs administered by the DOC.                                           Contact refers to the initial legal encounters through law
                                                                          enforcement (arrest) and to ongoing contact through actions
                                                                          within the juvenile justice system such as diversion, detention,
Aftercare/Re-entry                                                        referral to juvenile court, issuance of petitions, adjudication
  The Department of Corrections Juvenile Corrections
                                                                          as delinquent, placement on probation, placement in secure
Agents (JCA) provides aftercare services. JCAs maintain case
                                                                          juvenile corrections, transfer to adult court, and other such
management supervision and begin aftercare planning once a
                                                                          processes.
youth is placed in a DOC facility. The Department of Human
                                                                                                                States undertake efforts
Services operates one transitional living program for young
                                                                                                          to reduce DMC by moving
men who are unable to return home.
                                                                                                          through phases: Identifica-
                                                                                                          tion, Assessment, Intervention,
Victim Rights & Services                                                                                  Evaluation, and Monitoring.
  South Dakota extends rights to victims of juvenile offenders.                                                 Each State must report
The Department of Social Services administers the crime                                                   on its progress and describe
victim compensation program.                                                                              its DMC reduction plan for
                                                                                                          the coming 3 years and the
Juvenile Justice Core Requirements for States                                                             next year. OJJDP reviews the
  In 2003, the South Dakota legislature enacted legislation to                                            plan and its updates annually.
assure South Dakota’s compliance with the core protections                Failure to show progress in its DMC reduction plan under
for youth required in the JJDP Act. As a result, the state                review could result in a state losing 20 percent of its Formula
became for more than half a million dollars in federal grants             Grants allocation for the year.
from the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act.
The guidelines to receive federal funds stated:                           South Dakota’s Approach to Addressing DMC
  •Juveniles cannot be held in adult jails or prisons                        The Council of Juvenile Services (CJS) was established by
  •If, as allowed under certain conditions within the first                the state legislature in 2003. The CJS works with the South
    48 hours after apprehension, a juvenile is held in                    Dakota Department of Corrections (SD-DOC) to implement
    jail or prison, they must be separated both in sight                  the JJDP formula grants within the state.
    and sound from imprisoned adults.                                        South Dakota addressed the question of overrepresentation
  •CHINS – Children in Need of Supervision cannot be                      of minorities in secure confinement in the juvenile justice
    detained in secure facilities                                         system. In December 2005, the South Dakota Department
  •Disproportionate minority contact must be addressed                    of Corrections and the Council of Juvenile Services released
    by the state.                                                         the report “Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
                                                                          Program. Disproportionate Minority Contact Report.”
  The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention                (The Report is on-line at:
(OJJDP) also required all States participating in the Formula             http://www.state.sd.us/corrections/DMCReport2005Final.pdf)
Grants Program (Title II, Part B, of the Act) to address
disproportionate minority confinement (DMC) in their State
plans. In 2002, the JJDP Act broadened the DMC initiative from
disproportionate minority “confinement” to disproportionate

South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project ♦ Business Research Bureau ♦ The University of South Dakota ♦ 414 E. Clark St. Vermillion, SD 57069-2390
                                                                                              Facts on Kids in South Dakota

Highlights of South Dakota’s DMC Report                                 Focus groups also identified solutions to reduce delinquency
   In Fiscal Year 2005, South Dakota completed the                      and DMC. Responses were cultural sensitivity/diversity
identification phase of the DMC process. Based on data                   training, holding adults accountable, including spiritual aspects
collected, “DMC was found to exist in South Dakota’s juvenile           as a part of the solution, breaking the cycle of negativity, and
justice system. The arrest stage was found to exhibit the most          mentoring programs, to name a few.
evidence of minority overrepresentation within the juvenile                 More information on these issues can be found in
system.”2                                                               “Assessment of Disproportionate Minority Contact in South
   The report found 17.5% of children and youth under age               Dakota,” by Gary R. Leonardson and Roland Loudenberg, is
18 in South Dakota were minority youth. The largest minority            available from the South Dakota Department of Corrections.
population was Native American youth (15%).                             (The report can be accessed at: http://www.state.sd.us/
   For several of the stages in the juvenile justice process data       CORRECTIONS/FullDMCReportFinal.pdf).
showed the following:
                                                                        Intervention
   •The arrest3 rate for Native American youth was 2.40                    The Council of Juvenile Services, responsible for juvenile
   times higher than the arrest rate for Caucasian youth.               justice system planning and oversight of South Dakota’s
                                                                        compliance with the JJDP Act, created the Disproportionate
   •The detention rate for Native American youth was 1.62               Minority Contact Committee to examine DMC statewide
   times higher than the detention rate for Caucasian youth.            and also recommend interventions workgroups in Sioux
                                                                        Falls, Rapid City and Sisseton. Statewide DMC intervention
   •Petitions filed for Caucasian youth was 1.19                         strategies were developed:
   times higher than the rate filed for Native American youth.
                                                                           •Funded DMC interventions in Sioux Falls, Rapid City
   •The adjudication rate for Caucasian youth was                          and Sisseton.
   1.11 times higher than the adjudication rate for Native
   American youth.                                                         •Increase collaboration with Indian tribes and the state
                                                                           juvenile justice system.
   •The probation rate for Native American youth was 1.20
   times higher than the probation rate for Caucasian youth.               •Assess the cultural competency of state agencies and
                                                                           departments.
   •The detention as a disposition rate for Native American
   youth was 1.20 times higher than the rate for Caucasian                 •Offer cultural competency training for each agency/
   youth.                                                                  department/system.

   • The commitment rate for Native American youth was                     •Improve quantity and quality of data for the study of
   2.33 times higher than the commitment rate for Caucasian                DMC.
   youth.
                                                                           •Create legal education program for parents.
   •The secure placement rate for Native American youth
   was 1.59 times higher than for Caucasian youth.                         •Continue to support three local DMC workgroups.

Assessment                                                                 •Research impact on raising compulsory school
   The South Dakota Department of Corrections (DOC)                        attendance from 16 to 18.
concluded that it needed to understand why such
overrepresentation exists. Mountain Plains Research conducted              •Disseminate DMC information.
both a quantitative and a qualitative study assessment of DMC
to help in identifying interventions that could reduce the                The remaining phases, evaluation (to evaluate the
occurrence of DMC. Twelve focus groups were held across                 effectiveness of the chosen intervention strategies) and
the state with 92 total participants. Focus group respondents           monitoring (to note changes in DMC trends and to adjust
cited bias in the system from law enforcement, state’s attorney,        intervention strategies as needed) will be completed when
and judges. Reasons cited by focus group respondents were               the intervention strategies have been implemented and results
different laws, mores and cultural values between Reservation           compiled.
and Non-Reservation areas; inconsistent family life/structure;
truancy and dropout rates; substance abuse; and environment-
loss of culture/identity; to name a few.


South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project ♦ PH: (605) 677-5287 ♦ FAX: (605) 677-5427 ♦ Email: kidscount@usd.edu ♦ http://www.sdkidscount.org
          SD KIDS COUNT Project
          Business Research Bureau
          The University of South Dakota
          414 East Clark Street
          Vermillion, SD 57069




Notes:                                                              Resources:
1
 Information for this section is used with permission from:         •OJJDP’s DMC website at http://www.ojjdp.ncirs.org/dmc.
National Center for Juvenile Justice. 2006. “South Dakota.” State   •South Dakota Department of Correction website:
Juvenile Justice Profiles. Pittsburgh, PA: NCJJ.                     http://www.state.sd.us/DOC
Online. http://www.ncjj.org/stateprofiles/.                          •South Dakota Voices for Children. The South Dakota Juvenile
2
                                                                    Justice System Guidebook for Youth and Parents. http://www.
 South Dakota Department of Corrections and Council of Juvenile
Services (2005) Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
                                                                    sdvoicesforchildren.org/JJGuidBk.pdf
Program. Disproportionate Minority Contact Report. (Page 9).        •Kids, Crimes, Choices: What Can We Do? by Susan M.
                                                                    Randall, Ph.D., Jeanmarie Heriba, and Ruth Yellow Hawk.
3
 If the youth is a juvenile, the youth is apprehended and not       Available from The Chiesman Foundation for Democracy:
“arrested.”                                                         http://www.chiesman.org/publications.php#6
                                                                    •The Juvenile Court The Future of Children,.
                                                                    (Vol. 6, No 3, Winter 1996). Accessible online at:
                                                                    http://www.futureofchildren.org/homepage2824/archive.htm
The South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project
(www.sdkidscount.org) is a national and state-by-state effort,
sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, to track the status     Facts on KIDS in South Dakota is published by South
of children in the United States. By providing policymakers         Dakota KIDS COUNT, Business Research Bureau, The
and citizens with benchmarks of child well-being, KIDS              University of South Dakota.
COUNT seeks to enrich local, state, and national discussions        Special thanks to:
concerning ways to secure better futures for children and           Kevin McLain, SD Department of Corrections.
families. Additional funding for the state project comes from       Jay Newberger
the South Dakota Departments of: Education, Human Services,         Susan Randall, Exec. Dir., SD Voices for Children.
and Social Services.                                                Heather Conrad, Summer Staff Assistant
     Facts on Kids in South Dakota
       was on the rise. The public perceived that the system               acknowledged that the threat of juvenile violence and
       was too lenient and many states passed punitive laws,               delinquency was grossly exaggerated in the 1990s;
       including mandatory sentences and automatic waivers                 however, the fear experienced at the time resulted in
       to adult court for certain crimes.                                  significant changes to the U.S. approach to juvenile
          In the 1990’s this tough on crime trend accelerated.             crime.
       Between 1992 and 1997, states changed laws in one or
       more of the following areas3:                                       What is the juvenile justice system?5
          •Transfer provisions—Laws made it easier to transfer               There are several parts to the juvenile justice system
       juvenile offenders from the juvenile justice system to              and each has its own role to play:
       the criminal justice system (45 States).
          •Sentencing authority—Laws gave criminal and                       •The police determine whether or not a particular
       juvenile courts expanded sentencing options (31                     act or behavior by a child appears to violate a law.
       States).
          •Confidentiality—Laws modified or removed                            •The state’s attorney decides whether to h a n d l e
       traditional juvenile court confidentiality provisions                it informally, through a referral to a diversion
       by making records and proceedings more open (47                     program, or whether to notify the court by filing a
       States).                                                            petition alleging the child to be a delinquent or status
          Changes were also seen in the areas of victims rights            offender.(“referral”).
       and correctional programming. Victims of juvenile
       crime had an increased role in the juvenile justice                   •Diversion programs are normally operated by local
       system in 22 states. With new transfers and sentencing              private organizations and provide youth the opportunity
       laws, correctional administrators in the adult and                  to avoid a juvenile record by completing a program
       juvenile corrections systems developed new programs.                (Teen Court, shoplifting program, alcohol and drug
                                                                           education).
       ‘Get Tough on Crime’ Legislation in the
       U.S.4                                                                 •If a petition is filed, the juvenile court hears the case
          A steep rise in juvenile crime occurred between the              and decides if the child is guilty (adjudication) and if
       late 1980s and mid-1990s. The increase in crime hit a               so what the disposition should be.
       peak in 1994 and then began to gradually decline. In
       response to a fear that juvenile crime would continue to              •Probation is the most common disposition and
       rise at the rate seen between (roughly) 1987 and 1994,              involves the youth completing a period of supervision
       legislatures enacted measures designed to ‘get tough                in the community.
       on crime.’ The 1974 Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
       Prevention Act was amended to include provisions                       •Diversion programs and commitment to the juvenile
       that would allow states to try juveniles as adults for              corrections system for placement out of the home is
       some violent crime and weapons violations. Minimum                  also a disposition available to the courts in an effort to
       detention standards were also put into place in some                try to change the child’s behavior (“rehabilitation”).
       states. The anti-crime sentiment of the period caused
       changes to be implemented to the juvenile justice                   The Juvenile Court6
       system that made it increasingly similar to the adult               Since its inception the juvenile court system has handled
       (criminal) justice system. The shift Justice Stewart had            three types of cases: delinquency, status offenses, and
       predicted in 1967, with the implementation of formal                child abuse and neglect.
       trials for youth, reflected an increasingly common
       view that juvenile offenders were not youth begging                 Delinquency
       rehabilitation, but young criminals. Rehabilitation                   Juvenile delinquency is a child who breaks a law,
       became a lesser priority to public safety in the aggressive         which if committed by an adult would be a crime.
       campaign against crime of the 1990s.                                Delinquency cases are the vast majority of juvenile
          In the late 1990s Americans faced growing concern                court cases. South Dakota has set the age range for a
       over highly publicized and violent juvenile crime.                  juvenile delinquent as a child ages 10-17.
       A series of school shootings and other horrendous
       offenses caused the public to fear a new breed of                   Status Offenses
       “juvenile superpredators,” defined by the OJJDP as                      Status offenses are non-criminal behaviors that are
       “juveniles for whom violence was a way of life - new                illegal only for juveniles. Examples of status offenses:
       delinquents unlike youth of past generations.” The                  truancy or running away from home. At one time
       OJJDP’s February 2000 “Juvenile Justice Bulletin,”                  status offenses were treated as a type of delinquency

South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project ♦ Business Research Bureau ♦ The University of South Dakota ♦ 414 E. Clark St. Vermillion, SD 57069-2390
                                                                                                  Facts on Kids in South Dakota
       in terms of intervention and treatment. In the 1960s-               It was not until 1934, with the passage of the Indian
       70’s states passed laws to distinguish the two. Instead          Reorganization Act, that tribes were encouraged by the
       of incarceration for status offenses, services for them          federal government to enact their own laws and to establish
       were developed.                                                  their own justice systems. Many tribes, however, did not
                                                                        adopt their own codes at that time, but rather operated
       Child Abuse and Neglect                                          under provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations
         The court provides protection for children who                 (CFR). Due to lack of financial resources, many smaller
       have allegedly been abused or neglected. The juvenile            tribes could not afford to operate their own tribal courts
       court:                                                           and retained the CFR courts operated by the Bureau of
         1. determines the validity of the child abuse or               Indian Affairs. There are approximately 23 CFR courts
       neglect allegations                                              still in existence.
                                                                           Approximately 275 Indian nations and Alaska Native
         2. decides whether the child needs to be placed in             villages have established formal tribal court systems.
       foster care or remain in the home with supervisions              There is widespread variety in the types of forums and
       and services.                                                    the law applied in each is distinctly unique to each tribe.
                                                                        Some tribal courts resemble Western-style judiciaries
       Tribal Court History7                                            where written laws and rules of court procedure are
          Since time immemorial, Native American and                    applied. An increasing number of tribes are returning
                                  Alaska Native tribes have             to their traditional means of resolving disputes through
                                  been keeping the peace and            the use of peacemaking, elders’ councils and sentencing
                                  administering justice in their        circles.
                                  homelands through the use                Each tribe, in developing its justice system, confronts
                                  of their own ancient laws,            three considerations: (1) Is our justice system effective
                                  traditions    and    customs.         in reaching prompt, long-term resolutions to disputes?
                                  Historically, the United              (2) Does our system ensure the safety and well being
                                  States federal government has         of our community by preventing crime? (3) Does our
       recognized the inherent sovereignty of Indian nations            justice system inspire confidence in its abilities to the
       to “make their own laws and to be ruled by them.”                tribal community and the outside American society?
       (Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217, 1958.) Traditionally,            In an effort to address all of these goals, many tribes
       most tribes resolved disputes and addressed criminal             establishing new tribal courts, or enhancing established
       activity by consensus, not by an adversarial system,             ones, are developing hybrid or blended systems that will
       as do Anglo-Americans. While each of the more than               incorporate traditional dispute resolution elements that
       560 federally recognized tribes in the U.S. possesses            have proven effective within their culture and community
       traditional methods of dispute resolution, formal court          while also insuring that due process is provided.
       institutions are a relatively recent development in
       Indian Country.                                                     Notes:
                                                                           1
                                                                            The Future of Children, a publication of the Center for the
          The development of tribal courts as they are now
                                                                            Future of Children, The David and Lucile Packard Founda
       known can be traced to a case arising in the 1880’s                  tion, pg. 5.
       on land that is now the Rosebud Sioux reservation in                2
                                                                            U.S. Department of Justice. December 1999. Juvenile Justice:
       South Dakota, when a Lakota tribal member, Crow                      A Century of Change. National Report Series, Juvenile Justice
       Dog, killed a fellow tribal member, Spotted Tail. At                 Bulletin. Retrieved January 20, 2006, http://www.ncjrs.gov/
       the time, there was no formal court system utilized                  html/ojjdp/9912_2/juv1.html.
       by the Lakota people. Utilizing traditional methods                 3
                                                                            IBID
       of dispute resolution, the tribe required Crow Dog to               4
                                                                            On-line source, Juvenile Justice FYI website accessed
       provide restitution to Spotted Tail’s family in the form             January 30, 2006, from http://www.juvenilejusticefyi.com/
       of goods and provisions. Although the victim’s family                history_of_juvenile_justice.html.
       was satisfied with the resolution, in the eyes of the                5
                                                                            Information from Kevin McLain, South Dakota Department of
       federal government, the tribal approach did not inflict                Corrections.
                                                                           6
       what it thought was appropriate punishment. As a                        Material for this section was obtained from: The Future
       consequence, the Department of the Interior, the federal                of Children, a publication of the Center for the Future of
                                                                               Children, The David and Lucille Packard Foundation. Volume
       agency responsible for directing Indian affairs, set up                 6, Number Three – Winter 1996 The Juvenile Court.
       the “Court of Indian Offenses” to handle less serious               7
                                                                               Obtained from website source: National Tribal Justice Resource
       criminal offenses and to resolve disputes between tribal                Center, http://www.tribalresourcecenter.org/tribalcourts/
       members through the application of federal law and                      Accessed January 30, 2006. Information is used with
       regulations-not tribal law or custom.                                   permission from The National Tribal Justice Resource Center.



South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project ♦ PH: (605) 677-5287 ♦ FAX: (605) 677-5427 ♦ Email: kidscount@usd.edu ♦ http://www.sdkidscount.org
         SD KIDS COUNT Project
         Business Research Bureau
         The University of South Dakota
         414 East Clark Street
         Vermillion, SD 57069




                                                                  Facts on KIDS in South Dakota
                                                                  is published by South Dakota KIDS COUNT,
                                                                  Business Research Bureau, The University of South
The South Dakota KIDS COUNT Project                               Dakota.
(www.sdkidscount.org) is a national and state-by-state effort,
sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, to track the status   Special thanks to:
of children in the United States. By providing policymakers       Kevin McLain, SD Department of Corrections.
and citizens with benchmarks of child well-being, KIDS
COUNT seeks to enrich local, state, and national discussions
concerning ways to secure better futures for children and
                                                                  Susan Randall, Executive Director, SD Voices for
families. Additional funding for the state project comes from     Children.
the South Dakota Departments of: Education, Human Services,
and Social Services.                                              Nancy Nelson, South Dakota State Data Center

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:11
posted:10/27/2011
language:English
pages:8
gjmpzlaezgx gjmpzlaezgx
About